Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power and IF), broadcast and studio equipment, manufacturing · California

ETM Electromatic

Newark, CA · ~102 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

ETM Electromatic runs at 72% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power and IF), broadcast and studio equipment, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

ETM Electromatic: 2.4 TCR = 72% of Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power and IF), broadcast and studio equipment, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

ETM Electromatic safety composite

ETM Electromatic scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 69% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 23%), blended into one 0-100 breakdown against same-industry peers. A missing measure drops out and redistributes its weight rather than deflating the score. This is a per-dimension breakdown, distinct from the single letter grade above it (which weights TCR alone against the BLS industry benchmark).

D

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2.39 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 69% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% of industry peers

Benchmarked live against every credibly-rated employer in the same NAICS industry code in the current OSHA extract (a segment must have at least 8 rated peers to benchmark). Not a legal or compliance determination; PlainSafetyScore's own weighting (TCR 40%, DART 35%, fatalities 25%).

TCR Δ

−2.5

2016→2022

ETM Electromatic injury rate improved

ETM Electromatic's TCR fell 2.5 from 4.2 in 2016 to 1.8 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2016 at 4.2 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=4.2 · 2017=2.0 · 2018=1.9 · 2019=1.9 · 2020=1.0 · 2021=3.9 · 2022=1.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 334220 · Newark, CA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 2.4 · 72% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #27/43
  • PHOTO David Clark Company …
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 17 inj
  • SIZE ~102 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: David Clark Company Incorporated (0.0 TCR gap)

Read with this employer → · Industry book → · California employers → · Look up another →

ETM Electromatic in the TCR neighbourhood

Average Total Case Rate among this establishment and nearest same-industry peers

TCR

What this shows ETM Electromatic averages 2.4 TCR (72% of the Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power and IF), broadcast and studio equipment, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

Source U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Injury Tracking Application (Form 300A) As of 2026-08-25

ETM Electromatic TCR series: 2016=4.2 · 2017=2 · 2018=1.9 · 2019=1.9 · 2020=1 · 2021=3.9 · 2022=1.8 · BLS 3.3

Where ETM Electromatic falls in its industry

247 Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power an establishments

Safer than 23% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #27 safest of 43 Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power an employers in California.

ETM Electromatic (102 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 115 employees and a TCR of 1.1 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 30 entities by Average employees (X) and Total Case Rate (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Larger & higher-riskSmaller & higher-riskLarger & saferSmaller & safer than peers 05001,0001,500 0246 Average employees Total Case Rate ETM Electromatic
ETM Electromatic (102 employees, TCR 2.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 115 employees and a TCR of 1.1

ETM Electromatic has fewer employees than the Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power and IF), bro median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.1. Workforce size and injury rate do not always move together within the same industry -- some of its smaller peers run higher rates than its larger ones, and vice versa.

Year-by-Year Safety Data

Year TCR DART Injuries Illnesses Fatalities
2022 1.8 0.0 2 0 0
2021 3.9 1.0 4 0 0
2020 1.0 0.0 1 0 0
2019 1.9 1.9 2 0 0
2018 1.9 1.9 2 0 0
2017 2.0 0.0 2 0 0
2016 4.2 0.0 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

334220 · CA · Newark

247 Amplifiers, (e.g., RF power and IF), broadcast and studio equipment, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 92 employers in Newark, CA · 4 cross-state NAT-TCR peers · 4 cross-state NAT-SIZE peers. Closest matches by relationship code are listed below.

Rel Establishment Metric
NAICS-TCR David Clark Company Incorporated 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Melville 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wallingford 2.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Amron International, Inc. 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE REFCO FARMS LLC 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE The Pinery LLC 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE Del Rey Packing Co 102 FTE
STATE-SIZE ONM 102 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 627 2,891 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lucid Motors HQ 2,632 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon Transportation Services : OAK5 2,181 FTE
CITY-NEAR Amazon.com Services LLC - OAK5 1,865 FTE
NAT-TCR Ucmc-Sky Cafe 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Station 26 Brewing Co 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Wegmans Corning 051 2.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Benson Systems 2.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Rochester Colonial Mfg. Corp. 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE SCM Metal Products 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE EMF,INC. 102 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lakepoint Augusta 102 FTE

Rel codes: NAICS-TCR · STATE-SIZE · CITY-NEAR · NAT-TCR/NAT-SIZE cross-state. Read with this employer →

Data Source: OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA), mandatory establishment-level injury/illness reports. Grades compare employer Total Case Rate (TCR) to BLS IIF industry benchmarks. Data covers years reported by this establishment: 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.